Luther at the Wartburg: Apprehension, Apparitions, and Expeditions

500 years ago, on Saturday, May 4, 1521, Martin Luther was apprehended and taken to the Wartburg Castle for safekeeping. The following is a compilation of accounts of his capture and his time at the Wartburg, as told by himself and his friends.

Martin Luther’s Accounts

Excerpt from Luther’s Letter to Georg Spalatin (Tues., May 14, 1521)

You would not believe the tremendous kindness with which the abbot of [Bad] Hersfeld received us. He sent the chancellor and the treasurer to meet us a good mile in advance. Then, once he had received us at his castle¹ with many horsemen, he himself accompanied us into the city. The city council received us once we entered the gates. In his abbey he fed us sumptuously, and he put me up in his own bedroom. At five in the morning² they compelled me to give a sermon, even though I pleaded in vain that I did not want the abbey to risk losing its imperial privileges, should the imperial officials set about to interpret this act as a breach of the safe conduct I had been given, since they were restraining me from preaching on the way home. I nevertheless told them that I had not agreed to the word of God being chained, which is also true. I also preached in Eisenach,³ but with the frightened clergyman protesting before me with both the clerk and witnesses present, yet humbly apologizing that this was necessary because he was afraid of his tyrants.

So then, you will perhaps hear in Worms that, in so doing, I nullified the safe conduct, but it was not nullified. For the stipulation that the word of God be chained was not in my power, nor did I agree to it. Even if I had agreed to it, I would not have been able to keep it, since it would have gone against God.

East side of the Altenstein Palace, 2018, photo. © 2021 Red Brick Parsonage.

So the next day⁴ he [the abbot] lastly accompanied us all the way to the forest and, after sending the chancellor with us, had all of us fed again in Berka [on the Werra River]. We finally entered Eisenach in the evening, after citizens of the city came out on foot to receive us in advance. In the morning,⁵ all my companions departed with Jerome [Schurff].⁶ I continued on through the woods to see my relatives (for they nearly occupy the whole region). After freeing myself from them,⁷ as we are heading toward Waltershausen, I was captured shortly after going right past the Altenstein Fortress. Amsdorf was necessarily aware that I was going to be captured by someone, but he does not know where I am being confined.

My brother friar⁸ saw the horsemen in time and snuck himself out of the wagon. They say that he arrived in Waltershausen on foot in the evening without receiving any welcome. I have accordingly been stripped of my own clothes here and have been dressed in horseman’s attire. I am growing out my hair and beard, so that you would hardly know me, since I haven’t even known myself for a long time now. Now I am living in Christian liberty, released from all the laws of that tyrant,⁹ although I would prefer that that swine of Dresden¹⁰ were worthy of murdering me for preaching publicly, if it should please God, in order that I might suffer for his word. May the Lord’s will be done. Farewell and pray for me.

Excerpt from Luther’s Letter to Nikolaus von Amsdorf (Sun., May 12, 1521)

My arse has gotten bad.¹¹ The Lord is visiting me.¹² But pray for me, since I am also always praying for you, that God would fortify your heart. Be confident, therefore, and when the occasion presents itself, speak the word of God with confidence. Also write and tell me how everything went for all of you¹³ on the rest of the journey and what you heard or saw in Erfurt. You will find what Spalatin wrote to me in Philipp [Melanchthon’s] possession.¹⁴

Drawbridge and entrance of the Wartburg Castle, 2018, photo. © 2021 Red Brick Parsonage.

On the day I was torn away from you, I arrived at my night-lodging in the dark, at nearly eleven o’clock, worn out from the long journey as a novice horseman. Now I am a man of leisure here, like a free man among captives.

Luther’s Table Talk (Summer of 1540)

Story of Luther’s Captivity

The elector consulted with his men about this matter and put his councilors in charge of hiding me away. But he himself did not know the location so that, if an oath had to be given, he could swear with perfect legitimacy that he did not know my location, though he did say to Georg Spalatin that if he wanted to know, he could find out.¹⁵ He was entrusting that detail of the affair to a nobleman. Amsdorf was also in the know, but nobody else. In a grove¹⁶ near Eisenach, [my brother monk] saw¹⁷ four horsemen up ahead, which prompted him to warn me as he snuck out of the wagon and stole away. Meanwhile the horsemen approach us in the hollowed-out road. They frighten the driver with an arrow; he immediately confesses.¹⁸ So they pull me down from the wagon and call me names. Amsdorf was faking it every which way. “Hey,” he says, “what kind of cruelty is this? Okay, okay, do with us as you wish!”¹⁹ in order to deceive the driver. In this way I am led away from the wagon and put on a horse. The horsemen seek out detours and various byways in order to trick anyone who might be pursuing, and they take up the whole day. At night I come into the Wartburg near Eisenach. There, as a squire, I often went down on hunts and to collect strawberries. I even conversed with the Franciscans.²⁰ But the affair was kept secret; the knights are great at keeping quiet! Two noblemen took me captive, Sterbach²¹ and Berlepsch, and I had two servants who were supposed to lead me around, but I would send them ahead of me to arrange dinner parties for me.²²

On Poltergeists

The furnace in the Luther Room at the Wartburg, 2018, photo. © 2021 Red Brick Parsonage.

[Luther is responding to the view of Andreas Osiander—who is not present—that poltergeists are not real. Luther holds that they are real based on his own experiences. After citing three such experiences, he continues:] Fourth, when I was at the Wartburg by Eisenach, one time some nuts start shooting at me from the hell,²³ which was also the devil’s work. I therefore scurried into bed. I experienced that myself. These are true stories.

Also, a dog was lying in my bed one time, so I took him and threw him out the window, and when he didn’t yelp and I asked in the morning if there were any dogs in the castle, the captain said, “No!”

“Then it was the devil,” I said.

Luther in Disguise

Doctor Martin Luther went to a monastery in Erfurt on horseback with a servant, after he was taken captive. Now as he is dismounting, a monk sees him and recognized him, and he says to another monk, “That is Doctor Martin!”

When his servant hears this, he quickly says to him, “Squire, you know that we promised a nobleman that we would be at his place tonight. Friend, get back on. We can still make it!” And he whispered in his ear what the monk had said. Once the doctor gets on and rides off, the servant leads him away again. He would otherwise have been strangled in the monastery during the night.

Soon thereafter, he comes to the Blackthorn Inn in Erfurt, where he shares a bed with a provost in his quarters. He had his canonical hours and pulled out his beads at the Lord’s Prayer. Then the doctor goes to him and says, “Sir, do you have anything else to do besides prattle with those beads?”

Then the provost had gotten mad and said, “I think that you are also one of those Lutheran scumbags, who despise all good Christian ritual!”

Luther’s Table Talk (April 5, 1538)

[Luther is responding to the pastor in Süptitz near Torgau, who has complained to him about apparitions and disturbances from Satan, who was pestering him by making loud noises at night, breaking all sorts of household utensils, hurling pots and dishes right past his head so that they broke into pieces, and laughing out loud at him while remaining invisible. After telling the pastor to be strong in the Lord and to pray to God and tell Satan off, Luther continues:] I was frequently harassed [by the devil] the same way in my captivity in Patmos, way up in the castle in the kingdom of the birds. I resisted him with faith and would confront him with that verse: “God is mine, the one who created man, and all things are under his²⁴ feet [cf. Ps. 8:7]. If you have any power over that, go ahead and try it!”

Friedrich Myconius’s Account

The papal legate and several bishops attempted to put pressure on the emperor not to keep any safe conduct for Luther, seeing as he was already a stubborn heretic and his errors had been long ago condemned in councils and by the popes. And that idea might truly have caught on, had they not been afraid of the common people and the nobility, who were extremely in favor of this cause at first, and if they did not have to worry about a revolt.

But when several intelligent and good-hearted men, especially Duke Frederick of Saxony, noticed these plots and saw that the papists were not going to relent, it was arranged for Luther to be disguised and to ride away. And when he came to Weissenburg, which lies in the Palatinate, Luther wrote a brief confession of his doctrine and protestation for the diet and soon sends it back to them.²⁵ He continued riding to Wittenberg and Saxony, etc.

The pious and praiseworthy elector, Duke Frederick, notices that the pope, legates, bishops, and clerics had decided that, since they could not beat Luther with writings, they would do away with him. But in order that he might get Luther out of their sight and notice, he arranged for Luther to be captured and carried away near Möhra, not far from Eisenach, in a valley alongside a wood, by several loyal, secret, and discreet people. It has never been heard of that a matter was able to be kept as secret as who had captured Luther and carried him away. Many people believed, including at the imperial diet, that it had been a serious capture—that’s how well the secret was kept. Doctor Jonas and several others were with him in the wagon,²⁶ yet they were unable to learn anything further than that they were benevolent enemies. But later, in 1538, Doctor Martin told us the whole story in Gotha, in the home of Johann Löben the tax collector,²⁷ so that Jonas, Pomeranus,²⁸ and all of us who were present were amazed.²⁹ A great many fine and engaging stories took place during this captivity, especially how the devil came to Luther twice at the Wartburg in the form of a large hound, intending to kill him, yet was overcome through Christ’s power. Also how he was in Reinhardsbrunn, in Gotha, and in Jena in disguise, did strange things there with the monks and others, and remained undiscovered. But there is too little paper in this book [to include all the stories he told].

Matthäus Ratzeberger’s Account

Now even after Luther withdrew [from the city of Worms] again, and the safe conduct reached its end in a few days, there was still reason to be concerned for him. But so that he would not be overtaken and that no complications would arise from Elector Frederick of Saxony protecting him beyond the safe conduct, Elector Frederick made arrangements in utmost secrecy for him to be captured and secretly carried away once he came to the border of his territory. But so that Luther would know how to understand this capture, it was confided to him in secret. Now he had Nikolaus von Amsdorf and Mr. Friedrich Myconius in his wagon with him, who were his traveling companions.³⁰ Of these two, Amsdorf was the only one he confides in about it, but Mr. Friedrich knew nothing at all about this affair.

Now when they come to the border right by the Schweina River not far from Eisenach, a horseman emerges from the woods in the style of a knight and pushes forward with his steed. Mr. Friedrich Myconius notices this and warns his companions that something wasn’t right; there was danger in the air. Meanwhile the squire³¹ also whisks forward out of the woods, along with a servant, and they all advance toward the wagon. The horseman starts a quarrel with the driver by asking, “What kind of people are you transporting there?”, and he knocks him down beneath the horse³² with his crossbow. The squire likewise jams his bolt³³ in front of the bowstring³⁴ and holds it up to Luther, saying that he should surrender himself as prisoner. The other two companions are alarmed and beg for mercy. But once they have interrogated Luther and he confesses that he was the one they were looking for, they quickly set him on a steed and lead him back and forth in the woods until nightfall when they reach the Wartburg Castle right above Eisenach.

The Bailiff’s Lodge where Luther was “imprisoned,” 2018, photo. © 2021 Red Brick Parsonage.

There they locked him away as if he were the most intractable prisoner, in a cell that was isolated from all people. Even the gatekeeper knew no better than that he was perhaps a criminal picked up on the street and brought there for imprisonment. Nevertheless, they did have a single page wait on him by carrying food and drink to him. Other than that, Luther was all alone and no one knew where he had gone. In this secret lodging (which he called Patmos), far removed from the people, Luther nevertheless tends to his writing so that he would not be idle. And since he was isolated, he had to deal with many apparitions and many disturbances by poltergeists, which caused him trouble. As one example, once when he was about to go to bed at night, a large, black English hound is lying on his bed and won’t let him get in. Luther entrusts himself to our Lord God, prays Psalm 8, and when he comes to the verse, “You have placed everything under his feet,” the hound suddenly vanished, and Luther remained calm and at ease that night. Many other apparitions likewise appeared to him during that time, all of which he drove away with prayer. He wouldn’t talk about them, though, for he said that he refused to tell anyone about all the many different apparitions that had plagued him.

Georg Spalatin’s Account

Now my Most Gracious Lord, already respectfully mentioned, Duke Frederick of Saxony, Elector etc., was still somewhat distressed. He definitely admired Doctor Martin, and it would have truly pained him deeply if any harm had come to him. He had no desire to act contrary to God’s word, but neither did he desire to incur the lord emperor’s displeasure. So he came up with a way to remove Mr. Doctor Martin from the scene for a while, to see if matters might be settled in the meantime. He thus had him notified the evening before he left Worms of how he was going to be removed from the scene, in the presence of Mr. Philipp von Feilitzsch, Mr. Friedrich von Thun (both knights), myself (Spalatin), and certainly not too many others. Out of respect for Duke Frederick, Doctor Martin submissively agreed to the plan, even though he certainly would have always much preferred just to get back at his usual business.

Doctor Martin departed with his companions. Now when they came to a place not far from Eisenach, people were arranged for who demanded that Mr. Doctor Martin get off the wagon alone, took him away, and led him to the Wartburg Castle above Eisenach. Hans von Berlepsch³⁵ was steward there at the time and conducted himself well and in a friendly manner towards Doctor Martin Luther.

A few days later, the rumor reached Worms that Doctor Martin had been captured. Some were saying he that had been killed. All sorts of strange reports were going around.

The companions returned home, and not everyone was happy with the affair. And there were many inquiries about how exactly it all went down and where Doctor Martin had gone to. Nevertheless, it was kept in such secrecy that there were certainly few persons, and only very few, who knew about it at court besides the two brother electors,³⁶ the persons already mentioned, Jerome Rudlanoff (the current secretary), and Hans Veihel,³⁷ so that my often-mentioned Most Gracious Lord, the elector of Saxony, Duke Frederick, was also very pleased about it.

Johannes Mathesius’s Account

But since Dr. Luther was nevertheless put under the emperor’s ban and under the pope’s excommunication as an arch-heretic, our God—from whom all good counsels, actions, and ideas come—prompted the very wise elector of Saxony to issue an order, through confidential and discreet people, to put the outlawed and excommunicated Dr. Luther away for a while, just as the pious servant of God, Obadiah, King Ahab’s palace steward, hid 200 priests in a cave for a while and fed them, when the godless Queen Jezebel was seeking to take them down life and limb.³⁸ But the just-mentioned elector himself did not want to know where they were going to take his prisoner, so that, if he was ever asked, he could excuse himself with reasonable validity. For it would have been difficult for him to withhold a man from great potentates and the entire empire, or to defend him before them, after an edict had been issued. In the meantime he was hoping that God would take up the cause of his Word and his confessor, which is what happened, and subsequent counsel and action speak further to this matter.

This plan to hide or put away our doctor didn’t sit right with him, for he would have gladly and willingly shed his blood as a testimony to the truth. But he went along with this wise counsel at the eager insistence of good people, since St. Paul, the holy apostle, had also let himself be lowered over the walls of Damascus by his brothers, and our faithful God had warned the wise men from the East through his holy angel, so that they wouldn’t trot right into the cunning snare of Herod, that royal fox.

Site of Luther’s capture (facing east), 2018, photo. © 2021 Red Brick Parsonage.

So then, Dr. Luther left the imperial herald behind at Oppenheim, traveled through Hesse on the landgrave’s safe conduct, and arrived safely at the Harz Mountains. From there he had to travel through a forest to Waltershausen. He dismissed several of the traveling companions who were accompanying him through the woods. The others he sent ahead to make the lodging arrangements. Meanwhile, not far from Altenstein, he comes to a hollow in the road. There two noblemen, von Steinburg³⁹ and Captain Prelops,⁴⁰ pounce on him, along with two servants. After one of them gets information from the driver, they tell them to halt and grab hold of Dr. Luther with feigned brutality and pull him out of his wagon. The one servant strikes the driver and forces him to drive away, thus carrying Mr. Amsdorf away, while they get a rider’s mantel on the prisoner and help him onto a horse. They then lead him through the woods along the ascending horseman’s path for several hours, until night overtakes them. They also tie a man to a horse so that they would be bringing a prisoner with them. In this way they arrive at the Wartburg Castle near Eisenach just before midnight, sometime around Rogation week.⁴¹ There they treat the prisoner⁴² decently and well, so that even the cellar keeper is surprised by it. There Dr. Luther stays in his cell, as St. Paul stayed in his room while imprisoned in Rome. He would have preferred to be in Wittenberg and to tend to his teaching duties and, as he writes soon afterwards to good friends, to lie upon glowing coals for the glory of God and the confirmation of his word.⁴³ Nevertheless, he endured in obedience for a time, in order that he might not bring any greater danger upon his dear elector’s land and people.

But because our doctor is tired and weary from the journey, as he complains in a letter,⁴⁴ since the horsemen were leading him around in the woods for so long until the dark night overtook them, we will let him rest for a bit and regain his strength.

Next time we will further hear in the name of God what he accomplished in his captivity…

[Mathesius continues in the next sermon:] Now since our doctor faithfully served us and all of Christendom in his Patmos and captivity with his blessed work and testimony, this time we want to hear about the good that this hermit accomplished in his wilderness…

Although Doctor Luther stayed very inconspicuous at the Wartburg Castle, he was not idle. Instead, he daily tends to his studies and prayers and applies himself to the Greek and Hebrew Bible. He also wrote many good and comforting letters to his good friends. On Sundays and festivals he preaches to his host and confidential people and earnestly admonishes them to prayer.

But since a person cannot know the power of God’s word without the holy cross, and cannot subdue and disable flesh and blood without the rod of God, God sends all kinds of crosses to our hermit, for which he sincerely and faithfully thanks his God in a letter to a good friend.⁴⁵ For he falls into a severe and dangerous physical infirmity that even caused him to renounce all claims on life. The devil likewise plagues him fiercely with depressing thoughts and tries to delude him with all kinds of phantoms and loud noises. In such trials and afflictions, God’s word, his own ardent sighs, and the heartfelt intercession of his brothers are the comforting staff and rod on which he leans, and he thereby patiently endures God’s testing. …

Now since our doctor continues his studies and writing in his hideout in this way and becomes frail as a result, good friends advise him to go on walks and get some fresh air and exercise for the sake of his health. He is therefore taken along on hunts, and sometimes he goes out to pick the strawberries on the castle hill. Eventually he is allowed to have an honorable servant, a discreet horseman, whose loyalty and gentlemanly objections and admonitions he often praised later, since he forbade him to set aside his sword in lodgings and told him not to go leafing through the books anymore, so that no one would take him for a writer. In this way Dr. Luther is able to visit several monasteries without being recognized.

He visits his friends in Martsal,⁴⁶ but they do not recognize Squire Georg (as the horseman calls him). In Reinhardsbrunn a lay brother recognized him.⁴⁷ When his steward notices this, he reminds his squire that he had to be at an appointed function that evening, so he quickly takes off again.⁴⁸

Translator’s Afterword

Friedrich Myconius (or Mecum; 1490–1546) was Luther’s friend and correspondent and the head pastor in Gotha. Matthäus Ratzeberger (1501–1559) was Luther’s friend and Elector Johann Friedrich of Saxony’s court physician from 1538 to 1546. Georg Spalatin (1484–1545) was Luther’s friend and correspondent and Elector Frederick the Wise’s court chaplain and secretary at the time when Luther was captured. Johannes Mathesius (1504–1565) studied under Luther and was a frequent guest at his table before becoming a pastor in Joachimsthal (today Jáchymov, Czech Republic), where he eventually preached a sermon series on Luther’s life. Anton Lauterbach (1502–1569), who recorded the April 5, 1538 Table Talk above, also studied under Luther and sat at his table. He served as a deacon in Leisnig from 1533 to 1536, as a deacon in Wittenberg from 1537 to 1539, and then as a pastor in Pirna from 1539 until his death.

When one compares the accounts above, one notices striking agreement on the whole, even if there are some noticeable discrepancies in the particulars. (Many of Luther’s friends had not traveled like he had, and none of them had access to Google Maps.) For instance, even though several of Luther’s friends were mistaken in the identity of his second traveling companion (the one besides Amsdorf), they are generally agreed that this companion was the first to notice Luther’s captors approaching. They also agree on the location of the capture, even though different reference points are used. (All of these descriptions support the current marker identifying the spot of Luther’s capture at the site of the former Luther Beech Tree.) Violence and threats were clearly used in extracting Luther from the wagon, and it appears that the anonymous driver bore the brunt of it. Luther clearly did take somewhat risky trips to cities and monasteries in the area after he had grown out his hair and beard, took enjoyment in conversing incognito about religious matters related to his reformation, and was once nearly recognized by a monk, though there is disagreement on the location. Between his stand at the Diet of Worms and his capture and confinement at the Wartburg all by themselves, one can readily understand why Luther’s life continues to fascinate historians—both Christian and non, both serious and casual.

As for Luther’s poltergeists and apparitions, while we would be foolish to discount the possibility that some of these phenomena had physical causes, we would be far more foolish to discount the possibility of real encounters with the devil and his demons. About two decades ago, Prof. (now Dr.) Mark Paustian wrote (More Prepared to Answer [Milwaukee: Northwestern, 2004], 87–88):

I once sat through a long night with a young woman who was literally paralyzed with fear of the the “man” that came to her every night, whispering, “Stay away from those Christians. You’re mine.” Unable to speak, trembling, barely able to move for the fright, she would jump and shriek as if she was being prodded and poked. I’ve heard similar accounts from people I know well… This from level-headed people who know what psychosis is, and what it isn’t.

More recently, Prof. E. Allen Sorum writes in 2000 Demons: No Match for My Savior (2016) about the all-too-real world of evil spirits and demon possession—today, not just back in so-called primitive times. When we consider how the devil has worked throughout history, and then remember in addition the spiritually and religiously critical time in which Luther lived, and the crucial role God had him play in it, the stories above should hardly surprise us.

A side note for history teachers, whether Lutheran or not: We need to stop calling the disguised Martin Luther “Knight George.” He was never disguised or treated as a knight. He was called “Junker Jörg or Georg.” A Junker is a squire, a young nobleman acting as an attendant to a knight before becoming a knight himself. The word for knight in German is Ritter, or sometimes Reuter or Reutersmann (though these latter terms are also used more generally for any horseman), but never Junker.

For more pictures related to this event in Luther’s life, see here.

As this Luther Capture anniversary year draws to a close and the celebration of the birth of our Savior approaches, may Christ keep all of us safe from the devil in the fortress of his manger, of his Word, of his cross, of his baptism, of his grace, of his daily presence and care.

Sources (Listed in Order of Appearance)

• Weimarer Ausgabe Briefwechsel 2:337–38.
• Ibid. 2:334–35.
• Weimarer Ausgabe Tischreden 5:82, no. 5353.
• Ibid. 5:87–88, no. 5358b.
• Ibid. 5:103–104, no. 5375d.
• Ibid. 3:634–35, no. 3814.
• Myconius, Friedrich. Historia Reformationis, vom Jahr Christi 1517. bis 1542. Aus des Autoris autographo mitgetheilet. Edited by Ernst Salomon Cyprian. Leipzig: Moritz George Weidmann, 1718. Pages 40–43.
• Ratzeberger, Matthäus. Die handschriftliche Geschichte Ratzeberger’s über Luther und seine Zeit. Edited by Christian Gotthold Neudecker. Jena: Friedrich Mauke, 1850. Pages 52–54.
• Spalatin, Georg. Annales Reformationis Oder Jahr-Bücher von der Reformation Lutheri, aus dessen Autographo ans Licht gestellt. Edited by Ernst Salomon Cyprian. Leipzig: Johann Ludwig Gleditsch and Moritz Georg Weidmann, 1718. Pages 50–51.
• Mathesius, Johannes. Historien / Von des Ehrwirdigen in Gott Seligen thewren Manns Gottes / Doctoris Martini Luthers / Anfang / lehr / leben und sterben. Nuremberg, 1566. Folios 29 recto–31 verso, 33 verso–34 recto.

Endnotes

¹ Eichhof Castle, about two miles southwest of the Bad Hersfeld city wall.

² Latin: mane quinta. Some scholars (including the American Edition translator) have taken this phrase to mean “on the fifth morning [after departing from Worms],” namely Wednesday, May 1, 1521. But when mane is used as a substantive with an adjective, it is treated as a neuter noun; “on the fifth morning” would therefore be mane quinto. Mane quinta is literally “in the morning at the fifth [hour].” (The German St. Louis Edition translates it correctly.) According to Martin Brecht, Luther actually preached this sermon on Thursday, May 2, which would be the sixth morning after his departure (Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation (1483–1521) [Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993], 472).

³ On Friday morning, May 3, at St. George’s Church.

⁴ Luther resumes talking about his stay in Bad Hersfeld. He is picking up with what happened after he preached his early morning sermon on Thursday, May 2.

⁵ Friday morning, May 3, presumably after Luther preached.

⁶ In Eisenach, Justus Jonas, Peter Swawe (a Pomeranian nobleman), and Jerome Schurff left him.

⁷ According to a footnote in the St. Louis Edition and local tradition, Luther spent Friday night in Möhra, about twelve miles south of Eisenach, in the home of his uncle, Heinz Luther. There he preached in the town plaza on Saturday morning.

⁸ Latin: Frater meus. Luther is referring to Johannes Petzensteiner, his brother Augustinian, but throughout the years some have misinterpreted this to mean that Luther’s blood-brother Jacob was accompanying him.

⁹ Luther appears to be referring to the pope here.

¹⁰ Duke Georg of Saxony, one of Luther’s worst enemies.

¹¹ Luther suffered badly from constipation while at the Wartburg. He penned this sentence in German.

¹² Luther is using this phrase in the Hebrew and biblical sense of God bringing special blessing or discipline upon a person (here clearly the latter).

¹³ Presumably Luther is referring to Amsdorf, Johannes Petzensteiner, and the driver of the wagon.

¹⁴ Luther seems to be indicating here that he is already planning to write Spalatin a response letter around this same time (see the date of the preceding excerpt), and to send it with the letter from Spalatin to which he would be responding, so as to avoid the possibility of someone noticing any of his correspondence at the Wartburg, which would betray his identity.

¹⁵ The “he” appears to refer to the elector, since Spalatin himself says he was aware of the capture plans. (See his account later in this post.)

¹⁶ The Latin word nemus, borrowed from the Greek νέμος, denotes a wood with open glades, meadows, and pasture-land for cattle. According to the Grimm Brothers’ Deutsches Wörterbuch, the German equivalents are Hain, “grove,” and Lustwald, a wooded area that can be strolled through for pleasure (versus a thickly-wooded forest).

¹⁷ The Latin notes simply have Luther saying, “he saw,” but in the context, the “he” clearly has to be a traveling companion who is neither Amsdorf nor the driver, which only leaves Luther’s brother monk, Johannes Petzensteiner. One of the variants reads, “Pezenius saw,” which doubtless refers to Petzensteiner.

¹⁸ Namely, that Martin Luther is one of his passengers.

¹⁹ Latin: Tamen sumus in vestra potestate! Lit.: “Nevertheless, we are in your power!” The tamen here seems to indicate Amsdorf’s transition from pretending to complain and resist to pretending to give up in the face of threats and superior strength.

²⁰ See also “Luther in Disguise” and Mathesius’s account of Luther’s secret travels later in this post.

²¹ There are several variant spellings—Sternbach, Steinburg, and Sterpach. The Weimar Edition editor suggests that Hans von Sternberg might be meant, who later served as a guardian at the Coburg Fortress. But see also n. 38.

²² Between the variant readings here and the other accounts where only one servant of Luther is mentioned, it seems that there might be some confusion here between the two servants who assisted the noblemen in capturing Luther (thus adding up to four horsemen) and the servant or servants Luther was later assigned.

²³ “The hell” refers to the narrow space behind the stove between it and the wall, which could get very hot.

²⁴ This “his” seems to mean “man[kind]’s” rather than God’s or Christ’s feet. Even though Martin Luther did interpret Psalm 8 as a Messianic psalm, he also understood verse 6 as being equally valid for humans who believe in Christ, since they share in Christ’s power, rule, and blessings.

²⁵ Myconius either means Weisenau near Mainz, or he got his -burg/-berg wrong and is referring to Friedberg, where Luther did write a confession and protestation and send it back to the diet with the imperial herald. Either way, there was no Weißenburg along or near the route Luther took from Worms.

²⁶ Justus Jonas did accompany Luther as far as Eisenach, but he and two others parted ways with Luther there, since Luther went south from there to visit relatives in Möhra with Amsdorf and Petzensteiner. These two and the driver were the only ones in the wagon with Luther when he was taken captive. Amsdorf accompanied him as a friend who was in the know about the capture and could therefore help to deceive the driver into thinking it was a genuine capture. Petzensteiner, a fellow Augustinian, accompanied him unawares. Augustinian friars were required to travel in pairs, and even though Luther had been formally released from his vows in 1518, Luther was still voluntarily following this rule.

²⁷ Schosser could also mean “treasurer.”

²⁸ That is, Johannes Bugenhagen.

²⁹ Based on this information, it seems that Myconius was a year off in his recollection. We know that Martin Luther, Friedrich Myconius, Justus Jonas, and Johannes Bugenhagen were all present together in Gotha at the beginning of March 1537. Luther was recovering there after returning prematurely from Schmalkalden due to trouble with kidney stones (Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: The Preservation of the Church (1532–1546) [Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999], 186–88).

³⁰ Ratzeberger is mistaken about Myconius. Augustinian friar Johannes Petzensteiner was Luther’s other traveling companion.

³¹ The context makes clear that this squire is separate from the horseman already mentioned. Perhaps Ratzeberger calls him the squire a) in the sense of “his squire,” that is, the already-mentioned horseman’s attendant, b) because the squire had been specifically arranged for, c) because Ratzeberger knew who he was, or d) because he was a familiar character due to the number of times Luther or his friends had told the story.

³² German: unter den gaul. Ratzeberger already used Gaul to describe the horseman’s steed, but Gaul can also be used for a cart horse. So the horseman may have knocked the driver down on the ground beneath his own (the horseman’s) steed, or he may have knocked him down beneath the horse that was pulling the wagon.

³³ Short, thick arrow used in a crossbow.

³⁴ I am reading die senne or die sehne for die seine.

³⁵ Spalatin misspells it Berlewisch.

³⁶ Spalatin is speaking anachronistically here. Duke Johann was not an elector at the time, but would become one after his brother Frederick’s death.

³⁷ I was unable to discover anything more about these two men.

³⁸ Obadiah actually hid a hundred prophets in two caves, fifty in each (1 Kings 18:3–4).

³⁹ Some scholars identify this as Burkhard Hund von Wenkheim, who occupied the Altenstein Palace as a fief. But see n. 21 above.

⁴⁰ Most likely a misspelled reference to Hans von Berlepsch, the captain and steward of the Wartburg Castle at the time.

⁴¹ German: in der Creutzwochen, that is, during the sixth week of Easter, the week in which Ascension fell. The German name alludes to the fact that special processions (led by a processional cross) were made during that week. The English name alludes to the fact that special prayers were said (Latin rogatio = “petition, request”). Luther arrived at the Wartburg on Saturday, May 4, around 11 p.m., which could be considered part of Rogation Sunday, and therefore also Rogation week, when you keep in mind that, from a liturgical standpoint, every holy day begins at sunset on the previous day.

⁴² Mathesius seems to be referring to Luther here, even though he has just given the impression that Luther entered the Wartburg disguised as a horseman and someone else was made out to be a prisoner.

⁴³ See Luther’s Works (hereafter LW) 48:232, part of a letter he wrote to Melanchthon on May 26, 1521.

⁴⁴ See the excerpt from Luther’s May 12, 1521 letter to Amsdorf above.

⁴⁵ Mathesius seems to be referring to LW 48:255, part of a letter Luther wrote to Spalatin on June 10, 1521. But see also 48:307, part of another letter he wrote to Spalatin on Sept. 9, 1521.

⁴⁶ Dr. Georg Loesche said this refers to Martschall, north of Eisenach, but I can neither locate nor find another reference to any such place. Dr. Georg Buchwald misprinted it (and misread it?) as Wartsal and said that the location could not be identified with certainty.

⁴⁷ Namely, at the Benedictine Abbey there. A lay brother was an unordained member of a monastic order.

⁴⁸ Compare this to the Table Talk “Luther in Disguise” above.

Luther Visualized 16 – Busyness and Health

Luther’s Busyness and Ill Health

Lucas Cranach the Elder, Predella of the Reformation Altar in Wittenberg, oil on panel, 1547.

The painting shows Luther preaching, of which he did plenty. From May 1528 to June 1529 and from October 1530 to April 1532, for example, the parish church’s regular pastor, Johannes Bugenhagen, was on leave introducing the Reformation in cities like Brunswick (Braunschweig), Hamburg, and Lübeck, and Luther had to take over his preaching duties in the meantime. Toward the end of 1531, Luther told his table companions, “I am extremely busy. Four people are relying on me, and each one of them was in need of someone all to him- or herself. I’m supposed to preach four times during the week, lecture twice, marriage cases need to be heard and letters need to be written, plus I’m supposed to work on books for publication.”

The pulpit from which Luther preached thousands of sermons in the Wittenberg parish church, today housed in the Lutherhaus museum in Wittenberg (© Red Brick Parsonage, 2013). The two reliefs are of the apostles and evangelists Matthew (left) and John (right).

Several details in the Cranach painting above merit further comment. The writing in Luther’s Bible is indistinct; regardless of his sermon text, he can and ought to point his audience to Jesus (John 5:39). The audience consists of people of every age; the gospel of Jesus is for all (Matthew 28:19,20; Mark 16:15; Luke 18:15-17). Cranach painted himself in the front of the male audience; he viewed the message of Christ crucified for sinners as one needed by him first (cf. 1 Timothy 1:15,16). Katy and little Hans Luther are in the front of the female audience; even the reformer’s son needed to be restrained and taught to stay still and listen. In spite of the fact that the great reformer himself is preaching, there are still some in the audience paying attention to the “picture-taker” and not to God’s Word. At his table in the evening of December 26, 1531, Luther told his companions, “My preaching is useless. It’s like a man who sings in a forest to the trees and hears only the glad-sounding echo in return.” And yet, as he went on to say, “although many people badmouth [gospel preaching], it is still good to preach Christ for the sake of the few who do not.”

In addition to the strain of his professional duties and callings as husband and father, Luther also suffered at various times from the following health issues:

• Periods of depression occasioned by personal doubts, disease and death in his circle of family and friends, disturbances in the church, and the other health problems in this list
• Constipation
• Hemorrhoids
• Ménière’s (pronounced mane-YAIRZ) disease
• Recurring dizzy and fainting spells (likely caused by the previous)
• Soreness in his teeth and throat
• Recurring kidney stones (the most famous instance in February 1537)
• Gallstones
• Abscess on the lower part of one of his legs
• Recurring colds
• Diarrhea
• Severe heart attack in December 1536
• Dysentery
• Abscess on his neck
• Recurring headaches toward the end of his life
• Gout
• Arthritis
• Loss of sight in one eye (cataract?)
• Exacerbation of health issues from ill-advised treatments

Luther had definitely abused his body earlier in his life with, for example, his excessive fasting in the monastery. His life then changed drastically when he got married and went from not taking good care of himself to eating regular homemade meals prepared by his wife—a change to which his body probably never completely adjusted. But ultimately, it was the Lord who used these recurring health issues to keep Luther from becoming conceited, to show him the all-sufficiency of his grace, and to demonstrate that his power is made perfect in weakness (cf. 2 Corinthians 12:7-9).

Sources
E. G. Schwiebert, Luther and His Times (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950), pp. 580,581,748-750

Kurt K. Hendel, Johannes Bugenhagen: Selected Writings, vol. 1 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2015), pp. 33-53

Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: Shaping and Defining the Reformation (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990), pp. 204-211,429-433

Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: The Preservation of the Church (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), pp. 21-23,185-188,229-235

Weimarer Ausgabe, Tischreden 1:73, no. 154; 2:417-418, no. 2320

Luther Visualized 7 – Trial and Excommunication

The Papal Bull Threatening Luther’s Excommunication

Manuscript of the papal bull Exsurge Domine in which Luther is threatened with excommunication (Vatican Secret Archives, Reg. Vat., 1160, f. 251r)

This is a manuscript of the infamous papal bull (edict) threatening to excommunicate Martin Luther, proclaimed on July 24, 1520. It begins:

Leo etc. For future memory of the matter. Arise, O Lord, and judge your cause. Recall to memory your reproaches of those things that are perpetrated by senseless men all day long. Bend your ear to our prayers, for foxes have arisen seeking to demolish the vineyard whose winepress you alone have trodden. … A wild boar from the forest is endeavoring to destroy it…

Luther had sixty days from September 29 to send a certified retraction of his errors to Rome. Instead, on December 10, Luther appeared with the bull, trembling and praying, before a pyre lit in the carrion pit at Holy Cross Chapel outside the eastern gate of Wittenberg. He cast the bull into the fire with the words, “Because you have confounded the Holy Place [or truth] of God, today he confounds you in this fire [or may eternal fire also confound you]. Amen.”

Pope Leo X issued the actual bull of excommunication, Decet Romanum Pontificem (It Is Proper for the Roman Pontiff), on January 3, 1521.

Sources
Vatican Secret Archives, “The Bull Exsurge Domine by Leo X with Which He Threatens to Excommunicate Martin Luther”

Weimarer Ausgabe 7:183ff

Max Perlbach and Johannes Luther, “Ein neuer Bericht über Luthers Verbrennung der Bannbulle,” in Sitzungsberichte der königlich preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin, 1907), 1:95ff

Luther’s Works 48:192

The Vineyard of the Lord

Lucas Cranach the Younger, The Vineyard of the Lord, oil on panel, 1569, on the grave slab for Paul Eber in the Wittenberg Parish Church (photo by the Stiftung Luthergedenkstätten in Sachsen-Anhalt).

(Updated on 1/22/21:) When Paul Eber (8 Nov 1511—10 Dec 1569) was thirteen, his horse bolted, throwing him from the saddle and dragging him along on the ground for half an hour, leaving him somewhat crooked for the rest of his life. He went on to be professor of Latin at the University of Wittenberg (1541), head preacher at the Castle Church (1557), head pastor of the City Church and general superintendent of the district (1558), and the most influential hymn writer of the Reformation after Luther. When he died, his children commissioned an epitaph from Lucas Cranach the Younger, who chose a vineyard as the theme of the accompanying painting (pictured), which is still on display in the City Church (St. Mary’s) in Wittenberg. In the right-hand foreground of the painting, Eber and his family, including thirteen children, are kneeling at the fence on the right hand side. Eber, whose name means “wild boar” (from the Latin aper meaning the same), is holding an open Bible; he had been responsible for revising the translation of the Old Testament in the Latin Bible, since he was also an Old Testament professor. In the vineyard itself, the following figures can be identified (Rhein, 193):

In the foreground, Luther, Melanchthon, and Bugenhagen form a prominent triangle, which is extended by the vine-pruning Eber in front of them [thus Eber is depicted twice in the painting]. … Melanchthon is drawing water from a well to irrigate the soil, that is to say, he goes ad fontes, to the sources, the three holy languages of Hebrew, Greek, and Latin… Bugenhagen, finally, is hoeing the soil, thus establishing order in a way similar to his church orders… Other historical figures can be recognized next to those mentioned: Johannes Forster, who is watering the soil; Georg Major, who is tying the vines; Paul Krell, who is carrying the grapes away in a tub; Caspar Cruciger, who is driving a rod into the ground; Justus Jonas, who is digging the soil with a spade; Georg Spalatin, with a muck shovel; Georg Rörer, who is picking up stones; and Sebastian Fröschel, who empties the stones from a trough.

These men labor faithfully in the Lord’s vineyard, while the pope and his cardinals, bishops, monks, and nuns do their best to ruin the vineyard.

For more on this painting, read here. See also Stefan Rhein, “Friends and Colleagues: Martin Luther and His Fellow Reformers in Wittenberg,” in Martin Luther and the Reformation (Dresden: Sandstein Verlag, 2016), 192–98.

Codex Solger 13

By Professor Dr. Paul Pietsch, from the Weimar edition of Luther’s works, vol. 27, p. xvii-xviii
and the staff of the Stadtbibliothek Nürnberg (Nuremberg City Library)

Translator’s Preface

One of the manuscripts vital to Martin Luther research and to the publication of his sermons is the Codex Solger 13. This is marked with an “N” in the Weimar edition of Luther’s works, since it is in the possession of the Nuremberg City Library.

I didn’t know a lot about this codex, and needed to know more about it for the introduction to the forthcoming English publication of Luther’s 1531 Christmas sermons on Isaiah 9:6.

To sum up the content below, it appears that an anonymous copier recorded a number of Luther’s sermons as they were being preached from October 1528 to February 1532. That copier either was, or became, acquainted with Friedrich Myconius (1491-1546), Luther’s fellow reformer and intimate friend, so that Myconius ended up in possession of his transcripts, along with other transcripts. After Myconius’ death, the codex came into the possession of Joannes Aurifaber of Weimar (1519-1575), who is most famous for his 1566 edition of Luther’s Table Talk.

Who obtained the codex from Aurifaber’s library is not known, but at some point it was bound in pressed leather, came into the possession of a certain Seidel, and was appraised at the costly sum of 12 Reichsthaler.

Regarding this Seidel, I would appreciate any further information any readers might have. There appear to be three well-known Seidels – 1) an Andreas Erasmus Seidel (1650-1693), a representative of the Republic of Venice, 2) an Erasmus Seidel (1594-1655), a jurist and statesman in Brandenburg who attended the University of Wittenberg and died in Berlin, and 3) an Andrew Erasmus Seidel (d. 1718?) who is responsible for bringing Codex Seidelianus I and II to Germany from the East. (I suspect it is #3, but I cannot find any further biographical information on him.)

Dr. Valentin Ernst Loescher (1673-1749), who is known especially in Wisconsin Synod circles for his The Complete Timotheus Verinus (Milwaukee: NPH, 1998), got a good deal on the codex in Berlin, purchasing it for 10 Reichsthaler, 20 groschen, “from the Storeroom of Seidel Manuscripts.”

It appears that the codex went straight from Loescher’s library to that of Adam Rudolph Solger (1693-1770), another Lutheran preacher who collected books. In 1766, prior to his death, the City Council of Nuremberg purchased his collection from him. Solger had already had his collection catalogued, and the Nuremberg City Library presumably followed this catalogue when doing their own cataloguing – whence the codex in question obtained the name Codex Solger 13.

It appears that the Codex basically went unexamined until publication of the Weimar edition of Luther’s works toward the end of the 1800s. It is probably best known for containing a number of Luther’s exhortations to the congregation that he gave after some of his sermons. These exhortations give us a good idea of what was going on outside of church at the time.

As more of a scholarly rather than a devotional or edifying post, my prayer in providing what follows is that interested Luther scholars will be able to spend less time on the externals of Luther’s works and be able to focus more on digesting and communicating their Christ-centered content.

Excerpt from Volume 27 of the Weimar Edition

6) N = Codex Solger 13 in the City Library in Nuremberg. 523 pages in quarto, in a single old volume bound in pressed leather. The first 36 pages have been marked with a pencil in modern handwriting as 1^a, 1^b, 2-34, and 1^a again. The marking on the next 132 pages is probably contemporaneous with the text itself, since the same ink was used for both: 1-133 (132 is omitted). The next (blank) page is designated 125 in older handwriting, but in darker ink than the text, and the same goes for the pages after that, designated 126-471, though there is no page 153 or 364. Thus there are only 344 pages. In order to establish an accurate numbering for the entire volume, in more recent times the old blank page marked with 125 has been designated 133, and the following pages 134-477. After this portion of the manuscript with the double-marked pages there are 10 more pages that only have the modern numbering of 478-487.

Pages (1^b)^b, 16, 17, and (1^a)^b of the first modern numbering and pages 369^b, 370, 477^b, 486^b, and 487 of the second modern numbering are blank.

Contents

Page (1^a)^{a b} contains a biblical inscription by Melanchthon.

Page (1^b)^a reads: Idem ab alio dictum non est idem. [The same thing when spoken by another is not the same.] Beneath that: IN CONCIONES DOMINI(C) || CALES D M L ORDO || P M¹ || [AN ORDER FOR THE SUNDAY SERMONS OF DR. MARTIN LUTHER BY PHILIPP MELANCHTHON¹] The next 9 lines contain a discussion of how one should read the church fathers correctly and profitably. It begins: Cuiuscumque artis et scientiae autores lecturus… [“The one who is going to read the authors of any branch of art or science whatsoever…”] It concludes: …ut omnia didascalice et methodice proponantur. [“…in order that everything may be set forth didactically and methodically.”] (There is also a German sentence in the middle of the Latin text.) Beneath that: NB Rarissimum hoc cimelium Manuscriptum constat: 12 R. [“Note well: This extremely rare heirloom manuscript is valued at: 12 Reichsthaler.”] Beneath that remark: CONCIONES LVTHERI et BVGEN- || HAGII. || Manuscriptum Friderici || Myconii,² Pastoris ac || Superintendentis Gothani || Lutheri familiarissi || mi || ex Bibliotheca Aurifa || bri. || [SERMONS OF LUTHER and BUGENHAGEN. Manuscript of Friedrich Myconius,² Pastor and Superintendent in Gotha, Luther’s very close friend, from the Library of (Joannes) Aurifaber.] On the left, next to this last entry, there is also: V. E. Loescherus D. || ex Penu Manuscriptorum Seide- || lianorum Berol. emit || 10 R. 20 g [right after the g there is a symbol that is not reproducible]. [Dr. Valentin Ernst Loescher purchased (this manuscript) from the Storeroom of Seidel Manuscripts in Berlin for 10 Reichsthaler, 20 groschen.]³

Pages 2^a-3^b contain an index of the sermons in the order that they appear in the volume.

Page 4^{a b} contains an index of the sermons arranged according to the church year.

Pages 5^a-14^b contain an alphabetical index of topics and names for the sermons.

Page 15^a has a list of the Exhortaciones post concionem [Exhortations following the sermon].

Page 15^{a b} has some Exhortaciones [Exhortations] of Luther and Bugenhagen.

Pages 18^a-31^b contain the ΚΑΤΕΧΗΣΜΟΣ a Doctore Martino Luthero praedicatus [CATECHISM as preached by Doctor Martin Luther]. This is Luther’s third series of sermons from 1528 on the Catechism (Buchwald, Die Entstehung der Katechismen Luthers und die Grundlage des Grossen Katechismus, p. XI).

Pages 32^a-34^b contain the κατεχίσμος Froschelio praedicatus infirmante D. Martino [Catechism preached by (the deacon Sebastian) Fröschel when Dr. Martin was ill].

Page (1^a)^a reads (in red): CONCIONES DOMINICE D M L Anno domini 1528  15 die Octobris [THE SUNDAY SERMONS of Dr. Martin Luther in year of the Lord 1528  On October 15].

The following pages, (1^b)^a-477^a, contain these sermons, which extend to February 11, 1532.

Pages 478^a-482^b have the Catechismus a domino Ioanne Pomerano praedicatus tempore Pentecostes 1532 [Catechism as preached by Lord Johannes Pomeranus (Bugenhagen) at the time of Pentecost 1532].

Pages 482^b-483^a contain an introduction to the Epistle to Titus dealing with the person of Titus, after which there is information about the contents of chapters 1 and 2 under the heading Argumentum [Theme].

Page 483^b contains a note on a Psalm passage.

Pages 484^a-486^a contain a sermon by Bugenhagen from St. Michael’s Day [September 29] 1529.

Cf. Georg Buchwald in Theologische Studien und Kritiken, vol. 65 (1892), p. 339ff; vol. 72 (1899), p. 118ff; Beiträge zur Reformationsgeschichte (Festschrift for Prof. Dr. J. Köstlin, 1896), p. 49ff; Oscar Germann in Beiträge zur sächsischen Kirchengeschichte, Heft 14 (1899), p. 114ff.

This manuscript contains nos. 75, 76, and 78-91 in the present volume of sermons [namely vol. 27 of the Weimar edition, containing Luther’s sermons from 1528].

Excerpt from “Private Libraries” on the Nuremberg City Library’s Website

Library of the Preacher and Book-Collector Adam Rudolph Solger (1693-1770)

Purchased in 1766 by the City Council [of Nuremberg].

Call number: Solg.; Contents: 6,750 books and 96 manuscripts.

This collection is mainly comprised of theological literature, including a large number of valuable editions of the Bible. The real significance of the collection in found in costly manuscripts and in rare and collectible books.

The contents of the collection are listed in a printed three-volume catalog, Nuremberg 1760-1762.

Endnotes

¹ It is also remotely possible that the “P M” stands for piae memoriae (“of blessed memory,” in reference to Luther). I have taken it as referring to Philipp Melanchthon because of the “D M L” referring to Dr. Martin Luther and because of the preceding biblical inscription by Melanchthon. – trans.

² Even Georg Buchwald in his several articles pertaining to this codex (see the end) seems to attribute the actual sermon transcripts in this codex to Friedrich Myconius. But since, as evidenced from the information that follows, the sermons go from October 15, 1528, to February 11, 1532, this is impossible, since Myconius was a reformer and pastor in Gotha from 1524, almost 150 miles distant from Wittenberg by road. He was also active from time to time in Thuringia, e.g. participating in visitations there in 1528 and 1533, but that region, though closer, is also separate from the Saxony of Wittenberg. Thus it would be more correct to understand “Manuscript of Friedrich Myconius” as “Manuscript belonging to or in the possession of Friedrich Myconius,” and to attribute the sermon transcripts themselves to an anonymous copier who, at least eventually, became acquainted with Myconius. – trans.

³ We are indebted to the director of the University Library in Leipzig, Prof. Dr. Oscar von Gebhardt, for graciously communicating to us the precise information about the numbering of the Nuremberg Manuscript and the contents of the title page.

Luther’s Weekly Sermons on John 16-20 (1528-1529)

By Licentiate Otto Albrecht and Dr. Gustav Koffmane
From the Weimar edition of Luther’s works, vol. 28

Translator’s Preface

In preparation for Easter Sunday this year, I translated some of Luther’s 1529 sermon on John 20:1-10 from vol. 28 of the Weimar edition (D. Martin Luthers Werke: kritische Gesammtausgabe [sic] [Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1903], p. 425-447). Both because it was curiously laid out (with three versions on one page) and from past experience, I soon decided that it would also be worthwhile for me to translate the introduction at the front of the volume.

What follows is taken from that same volume, p. 31-37. The various page numbers, except when included in source citations, refer to pages in that volume. I have made some of Albrecht and Koffmane’s citations more complete than in the original, or changed their citations to earlier editions, as I deemed necessary for more easily locating the works they are citing.

I know next to nothing about Albrecht and Koffmane, the authors of this introduction.

I have also translated anew the historically significant preface by Nikolaus von Amsdorf referred to below under “Poach’s Version of the Sermons on John 18-20.” I will provide that in a separate post. I am still working on a translation of all three versions of Luther’s sermons on John 20:1-10 and 20:11-18 (Rörer’s transcript and Poach’s two editions) and will post those when I am finished. This may not be until around Easter of next year, or even later.

May increased study of Luther lead to an even more increased study of Christ and his life, death, and resurrection on humanity’s behalf.

Weekly Sermons on John 16-20
1528-1529

As a substitute for Bugenhagen (p. 1 above) Luther also took over the vesper sermons on Saturday from 1528-1529, which had always dealt with the Gospel of John for a number of years. (Cf. the quotation from no. XXXIII, p. 48, of the Zwickau manuscript on p. 2 above, as well as what Luther indicates in the sermon from March 25, 1529, in Buchwald, Andreas Poachs handschriftliche Sammlung ungedruckter Predigten D. Martin Luthers, 1/1:101, lines 2ff, and our edition 19:79, lines 21 and 25). Luther had already stepped in for Bugenhagen once before this, on February 15, at which time the text for consideration was John 14; Luther treated verses 1ff. According to what has been handed down to us in the present volume, Luther began to substitute for him on a regular basis on June 6, 1528, and he appears to have begun with a short sermon on John 16:1ff. Bugenhagen had probably finished John 14 and 15 in the meantime, and after his departure these sermons may have simply been omitted at first. Rörer conceivably recorded not only that one-time substitute sermon, but also the first of the continuous sermons in the notebook of sermons from the 1528 church year, as he likewise also certainly did with the first sermon on Matthew. The latter was preserved for us by a certain good fortune, while the others have been lost (cf. p. 3 above).

Certainly only the 35 sermons handed down to us by Rörer in Nuremberg 1^a and 1-34 belong to the series of Saturday sermons on the Gospel of John delivered at that time by Luther when he was regularly substituting for Bugenhagen. From the rest, which Poach imparts in his two versions in order to fill in the undeniable gap in Rörer’s transcript, the one designated as X^b in the overview is excluded; Poach himself assigned it to Easter Eve of 1533 in P¹ [Poach’s first edition]. Likewise the one from Easter Tuesday of 1529 (X^c) in P² [Poach’s second edition] certainly does not belong in our series. The sermon from Easter Saturday of 1529 (X^a) in P^1,2 can only be included in the series with reservation. The two sermons designated in the table as 32^a and 32^b apparently do belong to it and are borrowed from a different transcript in P².

In the sermons handed down to us by Rörer, John 16:1—19:22 and 20:1-18 are treated. In the one that can be included only with doubt (X^a), John 19:23-30 is treated. In those that appear to belong (32^a; 32^b), John 19:31-42 is treated. Since X^c (on John 20:19-23) certainly does not belong here, Luther thus concluded with 20:18, because Bugenhagen, who had returned, stepped in after that.

From these sermons, the ones on John 16 had remained unknown until now (they are completely different from those that were delivered in 1537, according to Mathesius’ testimony, and were printed for the first time in 1538; cf. Erlangen edition 49:1ff; 50:42ff). The ones on John 17 were published by Cruciger during Luther’s lifetime. The ones on John 18-20 were published by Poach in two versions, but not until after Luther’s death.

These weekly sermons were held fairly regularly at first. From June 6, 1528, to March 13, 1529, only nine Saturdays were missed, and for the most part we know or can surmise the reasons for Luther’s pauses during that time.¹ The treatment of the text shows no gap, which is proof both that he did not let anyone substitute for him for this series, as he did with the Catechism sermons in February of 1529 (cf. Buchwald, Beiträge zur Reformationsgeschichte, cited in Endnote 1 below, p. 50ff), and that the fault for the nine missing Saturdays does not rest with the person transcribing his sermons. But from here on difficulties in dating the sermons arise. After the sermon on John 19:8-14 (no. 31) from the Saturday before Judica [Lent 5], March 13, 1529, there follows in Rörer’s notebook another sermon without a date, on John 19:15-22 (no. 32). It has to be a different sermon, because otherwise the sermon on John 19:8ff would be twice as long as all the others. In addition, on p. 142^a of Rörer’s notebook one can clearly make out a paragraph that was written in different ink, and right before this paragraph this sentence is written as a sort of closing formula: “We want to hold off until Holy Week.” This undated sermon is probably to be assigned to the Saturday after March 13, 1529, namely March 20, the Saturday before Palm Sunday. That would agree with the fact that the next sermon on John 19:23-30 (no. X^a) is introduced by this marginal note in Poach’s first version: “The exposition that follows is taken from a sermon by Dr. Martin Luther that he preached on Easter Eve in 1529,” that is, on March 27, since Easter fell on March 28 in 1529. For more details on this, cf. further below on p. 35.

The next date expressly given in Rörer’s manuscript is not until June 12, 1529, for the sermon on John 20:1-10, and then the manuscript closes with the sermon on June 19, on John 20:11-18. Concerning the replacement sermons that Poach brings in for the texts John 19:31-37; John 19:38-42; and John 20:19-23 (partly in his first version and partly in his second version), these are addressed further below.

The large gap in Rörer’s transcripts between March 13 (or 20, if the undated sermon mentioned above belongs here) and June 12, 1529, can be explained mainly by two circumstances. For one thing, we know that from Easter Wednesday to Exaudi [Easter 7], thus from March 31 to May 9, Luther took a break from his Sunday sermons due to hoarseness (cf. Buchwald, Andreas Poachs handschriftliche Sammlung, 1/1:151, 155; DeWette, Dr. Martin Luthers Briefe, Sendschreiben und Bedenken, 3:442, 451; Enders, Dr. Martin Luther’s Briefwechsel, 7:85, 95). After that Rörer was given a leave of absence to Nuremberg between May 17 and June 13 (see Buchwald, op. cit., p. 175; Zur Wittenberger Stadt- und Universitäts-Geschichte in der Reformationszeit, p. 59-60, no. 64, fn. 1) and thus could not continue his transcript on the (three) Saturdays that occurred during that time. A marginal note related to this can be found in his manuscript on p. 144^b, which was added later: Desunt aliquot conciones [“Several sermons are missing”]; it is not next to the first line of the sermon from June 12, where it belongs, but occurs seven lines later. The person who wrote it probably did not notice that some sermons must have been omitted until that point while he was reading. That two of these sermons, which Rörer could not have transcribed, were preserved for us from another source in Poach’s second version may be accepted as true until someone provides proof to the contrary.

Thus Luther apparently interrupted his Saturday sermons on March 27, 1529, and then probably did not resume them until sometime near the end of May, concluding them on June 19 shortly before Bugenhagen returned home.

Rörer’s Transcript

Rörer’s notebook containing these sermons is the manuscript Bos. o. 17^m in Jena, which also contained the sermons on Matthew at one time (cf. our edition, vol. 27, p. xii, and above). The pages are marked 79-150. At the top of the first side (p. 79^a) the following words are written in faint ink, which were added later: Nunc vado ad eum qui misit me [“Now I am going to him who sent me” (John 16:5)], etc. and 2. pars [2nd part], which is perhaps meant to indicate that what follows is a “continuation” of the first sermon on John (no. 1^a) taken down elsewhere by Rörer. Either that, or the sermons on Matthew that were once included are to be thought of as the 1. pars [1st part]. After that comes the following in Rörer’s hand: Sabbato primae dominicae post Trinitatis quae erat 13 Iunii.  Ex Eo Ioh: Expedit vobis [On the Saturday of the First Sunday after Trinity, which was June 13.  From the Gospel of John: “It is to your advantage” (John 16:7)], etc. The dates are likewise in the margin or added in the lines for the sermons that follow. Two sermons have no date. Halfway through – between the sermons on October 24 and 31, 1528 – the sermon delivered at Michael Stiefel’s wedding appears, imparted in our edition, 27:383ff.

The Saturday sermon that Luther delivered as a one-time substitute for Bugenhagen on February 15, 1528, is found in the manuscript Bos. o. 17^e, p. 43^a-44^b, in Jena. The first of the sermons that Luther delivered as a regular substitute on June 6, 1528, is found in the same manuscript, p. 114^a-114^b. Cf. p. 31.

Cruciger’s Version of the Sermons on John 17

Luther’s hearers might have asked him to publish his exposition of the High-Priestly Prayer. Perhaps he himself had also wished and pushed for its publication before that. But since he himself had no time for that, he committed the task of working out the details of its printing to his friend Cruciger, according to Luther’s preface. Whether this assignment was first given after he had concluded the sermons or had already been given earlier, Luther’s preface does not say. Now Cruciger himself appears to have been one of the hearers, for he was in Wittenberg at the time (cf. the letters in De Wette, op. cit., 3:314,442; Enders, op. cit., 5:158f; 6:270f; 7:85; Mathesius, Historien von des ehrwirdigen in Gott seligen thewren Manns Gottes Doctoris Martini Luthers etc. [Nuremberg, 1566], fol. 80, 81²). That being the case, being able to recall what he heard in person certainly made his work easier. It is possible that he even took down some notes of his own. But certainly Rörer’s notebook served as the main source for his work, as even a cursory, comparative glance at both texts reveals. The places where Cruciger deviates from Rörer can be attributed first of all to the unconstrained method of the editor, who took pains to make his often unmanageable and enigmatic master copy readable by combining, supplying, and switching material around. Occasionally he also probably misread Rörer’s handwriting, which is very difficult because he wrote so quickly. Considerable alterations, however, like the ones seen, for example, in the sermon on John 17:6-8 (no. 12), permit us to assume that in addition to Rörer’s transcript Cruciger occasionally used still other sources, perhaps notes he himself had taken down.

Before Cruciger published Luther’s sermons on John 17, he had apparently already tried his hand once at such assistant work for Luther, with the sermons on Genesis (our edition, 24:xvi). Cruciger’s most recent biographers, Oswald G. Schmidt³ and Theodor Pressel,⁴ have failed to mention his work with both of these sermon series. In the foreword Luther rightly praises Cruciger’s ability. Later Cruciger himself transcribed the sermons Luther delivered in 1537 on John 14-16 (Erlangen edition, vols. 49 and 50) and published them in 1538 (Mathesius, op. cit., fol. 133).

Now since at that time the sermons on John 16 and 17 were printed together and the sermons on John 14-17 seem to have been combined in one volume early on (cf. the bibliography below and Buchwald, “Stadtschreiber M. Stephan Roth in Zwickau” etc. in Archiv für Geschichte des Deutschen Buchhandels [Leipzig: Verlag des Börsenvereins der Deutschen Buchhändler, 1893], p. 195, no. 615), one may also reasonably apply what Mathesius says on fol. 133 (op. cit.) to John 17, when he relates that Luther “very often brought this book” containing the exposition of Christ’s final sermon during the Last Supper “with him to church and enjoyed reading from it.” Luther then gave voice to this fondness at his table, saying that “this was the best book he had produced. ‘Though I did not produce it,’ he said, ‘for it is Dr. Caspar Cruciger who has demonstrated his great intellect and outstanding diligence in it. After the Holy Bible this has to be my treasured and most beloved book.’” This exposition was also afforded enthusiastic praise later, e.g. by Timotheus Kirchner in his Deutscher Thesaurus (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Schmid, 1568). And Köstlin is correct in his judgment that whoever wishes to get acquainted with Luther’s style of preaching must especially include the sermons on John in his studies (Martin Luther: Sein Leben und seine Schriften, 2:427)⁵.

Poach’s Version of the Sermons on John 18-20

First Edition of 1557 (P¹)
The editor named neither in the title nor in Amsdorf’s preface is the Erfurt pastor Andreas Poach. This is proven both by Poach’s reference to this first edition in the foreword to the second edition and by what he says in the letter cited just below. Poach, who first came to Wittenberg in 1530 and did not hear Luther’s sermons on John himself, designates Rörer’s transcript as his master copy in a letter to the privy council in Weimar (March 6, 1564; Theologische Studien und Kritiken, vol. 67 [1894], p. 377f). In that letter he also expresses himself concerning the circumstances which occasioned his work and its publication:

He [Rörer] also taught me himself to read his running handwriting and explained his customary characteres⁶ to me. He also entrusted me with a book containing the Passion sermons on the 18th and 19th chapters of John so that I could test myself on the characteres using that book. And my draft pleased Master Rörer and Master Stoltz so much that these Passion sermons were published in Jena and printed with a preface by the bishop Nikolaus von Amsdorf. And Master Stoltz entrusted his notebooks to me at that time.

As a matter of fact, Poach took pains to fill in the gaps in Rörer’s transcript already in his first version; whether he might have done so on the basis of the just-mentioned manuscripts of the court preacher Stoltz, we do not know. After the sermon on John 19:15-22, Poach remarks: “Here end the sermons of the man of God Dr. Martin Luther that he preached on the Passion in 1528 and 1529.⁷ What follows from here was taken from elsewhere, as indicated by the scholium that follows next.” This scholium is a marginal note that assigns the sermon on John 19:23-30 to Easter Eve of 1529 (p. 396 below). This appears to be a contradiction at first, for if what follows in Poach’s edition actually belongs to a sermon delivered on Easter Eve in 1529, then the note that Luther’s Passion sermons were concluded with John 19:22 is incorrect. But the contradiction can be resolved: Luther does in fact seem to have broken off the continuous Passion sermons on the Gospel of John at John 19:22, but we possess in Rörer’s transcript (published in Poach’s copied version by Buchwald, Andreas Poachs handschriftliche Sammlung, 1/1:113-118) a Passion sermon delivered on Easter Eve in 1529, which in fact mainly treats the text Luke 23:38-43, but in the middle also treats the text John 19:23-27. A comparative glance from Rörer-Poach (in Buchwald, op. cit., p. 114, 9th line from the bottom to p. 116, 3rd line from the top) to Poach in our text (P¹, p. 396, line 25 to p. 405, line 31 below) clearly shows that Poach draws solely from that manuscript of Rörer here in his first version (while he patches in a lot of other material in the 2nd version; cp. e.g. our text, p. 397, line 12ff and p. 398, p. 10ff with the Erlangen edition, 2nd ed., 2:116). “Taken from elsewhere” accordingly means that it was taken from that sermon on Luke 23:38-43, in which the text John 19:23-27 was nevertheless also treated in passing (cf. the cue-words Milites [“The soldiers”] – which is how Militis should be read – and Accepit [“(He) took”] in Buchwald, op. cit., which refer to John 19, verses 23 and 27). One almost gets the impression from Rörer’s transcript that on Easter Eve in 1529 Luther wanted to continue the sermon series on John in passing and therefore combined the two just-named texts with each other. Whatever the case, Poach’s scholium cited above is subject to misunderstanding and only partially accurate.

The sermon that then follows after that, on John 19:31-37, has the marginal note: “The following piece was preached by Dr. Martin Luther on Easter Eve in 1533.” We find this sermon in Rörer’s notebook, Jena manuscript Bos. q. 24^g, p. 121, with the house sermons. For the end of chapter 19, verses 38-42, Poach could not find any replacement whatsoever, so he leaves a gap here and immediately conveys his version of Rörer’s last two transcripts from June 12 and 19, 1529, on the beginning of the resurrection account according to John 20, verses 1-10 and 11-18. For the last piece he remarkably adds the marginal note: “Saturday after St. Vitus’ Day [June 15], i.e. Luther preached this sermon on the 19th of June in 1529,” even though he did not include the dates in Rörer’s manuscript elsewhere.

Thus Poach’s first version concludes with John 20:18. This version now also acquires a special contemporary interest due to Amsdorf’s preface, which we impart in the appendices in the back of the volume.

The trial work of Poach, instigated by Rörer (see above), was accordingly printed off “specially” at Rörer and Stoltz’s recommendation (cf. also Poach’s preface to the second version below) by order of the Saxon princes. “Specially” probably means separate from the Jena Tomi [tomes of the Jena edition of Luther’s works]. According to what Amsdorf says in the preface, this was in fact supposed to be done at the same time as two other writings – the “Confession” of the late Elector Johann Friedrich against the Augsburg Interim (cf. E. Julius Meier’s biography of Amsdorf in Meurer, ed., Das Leben der Altväter der lutherischen Kirche, 3:221) and a new edition of Luther’s Brief Confession concerning the Holy Sacrament (Erlangen edition 32:396ff; Köstlin, Martin Luther: Sein Leben und seine Schriften, 2:572ff). In view of the impending Colloquy of Worms (cf. Schmidt, Philipp Melanchthon: Leben und ausgewählte Schriften, p. 602ff)⁸, these three writings were apparently, according to Amsdorf’s preface, supposed to serve as a public warning against all Adiaphoristic, Majoristic, and Interimistic false doctrines. We have not been acquainted with any editions of that “Confession” of Johann Friedrich and of Luther’s Brief Confession from the year 1557. Nor have we come across any copy of the printing of P¹ bound together with those two writings. Dr. Knaake in Naumburg possesses a later edition of the Confession of Johann Friedrich. Thus Amsdorf’s preface, to which Poach especially appeals for his work from 1557 in his letter dated March 6, 1564 (cf. above), is actually referring to other writings which he expected to appear at the same time, but whose publication is not verifiable and perhaps never took place. It is also worthy of special note that Amsdorf, at the very beginning of his foreword, not only mentions Luther’s sermons on John but also his sermons on Matthew, which had been “put…on paper and dispatched…to press [in Druck vorfertiget]” (which probably means: “prepared for print [für den Druck vorbereitet]”) from Rörer’s transcript. Perhaps he means the sermons on Matthew that were at one time located in the Jena codex Bos. o. 17^m before the sermons on John (cf. p. 2 and above).

Poach’s Second Edition of 1566 (P²)
Poach dedicated his second version to Duke Johann Friedrich the Younger (or III). In the preface he justifies the new edition in the following way:

These articles of the suffering, death, and resurrection of Christ [whose twofold significance as a gift to be believed and as a pattern for our life he has just discussed in detail], as they were described by the holy Evangelist John and afterward preached and expounded on by the cherished man of God, Master Georg Rörer of blessed memory gave to me, as he had recorded them, about ten years ago. The idea was that I should test myself on them, to see whether I could decipher them. And when I had deciphered them as best I could, I turned the draft over to him and Master Johann Stoltz, the court preacher of blessed memory, and they had them printed at that time. But since no more copies were available and there was much demand for them, and since many Christians also desired that they be printed in the form of a handbook, I have gone through them again. In addition, I have been moved to do so by the fact that I was still inexperienced in such work at that time and my first draft reflected that. On top of that, in Master Georg Rörer’s inventory Luther’s exposition of the 19th chapter did not go all the way to the end so that I could carry his exposition all the way through that entire chapter. But now God has bestowed on me another inventory, belonging to a God-fearing and learned man who was also there to hear these sermons and wrote them down as Dr. Luther was preaching them. From this inventory I have supplied what was lacking in Rörer’s. I have issued this exposition, Gracious Prince and Lord, in Your Princely Grace’s name in all humility. In doing so I wanted to make it public to Your Princely Grace that the cherished man of God, whom I personally heard lecture and preach for eleven years, is the one I recognize and consider to be my prophet, master, and teacher, and I acknowledge now and intend to acknowledge until my end that I am his unworthy and feeble disciple. May God graciously help me to this end. Amen. …

For this version Poach does not seem to have consulted Rörer’s manuscript anew. He probably did not have access to it anymore, after he had offended the court in Weimar with an unauthorized edition of four previously unknown Luther sermons using the remains of Rörer’s notes (Theologische Studien und Kritiken, vol. 67 [1894], p. 375ff). But the definite assurance that he had located and utilized another Rörer-supplementing transcript in the meantime – an assurance whose accuracy we have no reason to question – gives the second version a critical significance all its own, in spite of its shortcomings. To be sure, he seems not to have used his other source – an “inventory” (i.e. a collection of notes [Niederschrift]), as he himself calls it – for a thorough revision of the first edition. Instead he seems to have used it mainly just to complete the parts that were lacking in Rörer’s manuscript, especially, as he emphasizes, to retrieve the missing exposition of the end of chapter 19. Accordingly, John 19 is concluded thus:

1. The Easter Eve sermon on John 19:23-30 from 1529 (X^a) – which, as we have already seen, Poach included with some justification – is essentially unaltered in P².
2. The sermon on John 19:31-37 from 1533 (X^b), which was admittedly only used in P¹ in a makeshift capacity, is replaced in P² by a completely different sermon on the same verses (32^a). And
3. the gap in the exposition that existed in P¹ is filled in with a sermon on John 19:38-42 (32^b).

But P² has not only completed the exposition of chapter 19; it has also extended the exposition of chapter 20 to 20:23. Poach did this by utilizing a Luther sermon from Easter Tuesday of 1529 (X^c). Poach made no mention of this in the foreword, nor was there any immediate reason for it, since this sermon does not come from the new transcript of sermons on John that he used. The original sermon is preserved for us in Rörer’s transcript; Poach’s copied version of it is found in Buchwald, Andreas Poachs handschriftliche Sammlung, 1/1:141ff. It thus does not belong to the series of Saturday sermons, the last of which was the one handed down by Rörer as such, from the Saturday after St. Vitus’ Day, June 19, 1529. Bugenhagen returned to Wittenberg on June 24; cf. Hering, Doktor Pomeranus, Johannes Bugenhagen, p. 78, 169.

In the sections that were already presented in the first edition by following Rörer’s notebook, manifold additions now appear, as well as (rare) abridgments, for the second edition. These are partly due to the liberal redacting of Poach, who like Joannes Aurifaber had learned how to think and write in Luther’s style, and partly due to borrowing from other sermons; e.g. for John 19:23-24 he conveys the spiritual interpretation by following the House Postil (Erlangen edition, 2nd ed., 2:115), then conveys the explanation of Jesus’ words to his mother by following the House Postil (ibid., 2:143).

Cf. Köstlin, Martin Luther: Sein Leben und seine Schriften, 2:155f.

Endnotes

¹ Due to sickness e.g. on January 30 and February 6, 1529; cf. Burkhardt, Dr. Martin Luther’s Briefwechsel, p. 158, fn.; Küchenmeister, Dr. Martin Luther’s Krankengeschichte, p. 62; Buchwald, “Die letzten Wittenberger Katechismuspredigten vor dem Erscheinen des kleinen Katechismus Luthers” in Beiträge zur Reformationsgeschichte (Festschrift for Prof. Dr. J. Köstlin, 1896), p. 49, fn. 3. Due to participation in the visitations on January 9, 1529, at least (De Wette, Dr. Martin Luthers Briefe, Sendschreiben und Bedenken, 6:98; Enders, Dr. Martin Luther’s Briefwechsel, 7:39).

² The editors Albrecht and Koffmane actually cited an edition of Mathesius’ sermons by G. Lösche, published in Prague in 1898, but I did not have access to this edition and thus cited a much earlier edition available on the internet. – trans.

³ Caspar Cruciger’s Leben in Das Leben der Altväter der lutherischen Kirche für christliche Leser insgemein aus den Quellen erzählt, ed. Moritz Meurer, vol. 2, part 2 (Leipzig & Dresden: Verlag von Justus Naumann, 1862). – trans.

⁴ Caspar Cruciger: Nach gleichzeitigen Quellen (Elberfeld: Verlag von R. L. Friderichs, 1862). – trans.

⁵ In Leben und ausgewählte Schriften der Väter und Begründer der lutherischen Kirche, ed. J. Hartmann, W. Möller, et al., II. Theil (Elberfeld: Verlag von R. L. Friderichs, 1875). Albrecht and Koffmane cited different editions of Köstlin’s work throughout this introduction, but I have located and cited all of their references in just the first edition, cited in this endnote. – trans.

⁶ A transliteration of the Greek word χαρακτῆρες, which means figures or letters, referring to Rörer’s particular shorthand abbreviations and symbols. On Rörer’s complex system of Latin-German shorthand, see D. Martin Luthers Werke: kritische Gesamtausgabe, vol. 29 (Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1905), p. xvi ff, esp. p. xxii-xxiv. – trans.

⁷ Since Poach still conveys items from the manuscript after this, the stress is on the word Passion; the remainder deals with the account of the resurrection.

⁸ In Leben und ausgewählte Schriften der Väter und Begründer der lutherischen Kirche, ed. J. Hartmann, Lehnerdt, et al., III. Theil (Elberfeld: Verlag von R. L. Friderichs, 1861). – trans.

Michael Schulteis: Student in Wittenberg

By Wilibald Gurlitt

Translator’s Preface

The following was translated from Wilibald Gurlitt’s Michael Praetorius (Creuzbergensis): Sein Leben und Seine Werke (Michael Praetorius [of Creuzburg]: His Life and His Works) (Leipzig: Druck von Breitkopf & Härtel, 1915), p. 9-10. This is the third in a series of posts on Michael Praetorius.

For more on the author, click here. For more on this particular work of the author, read the Translator’s Preface here.

This section picks up after Michael Schulteis, Michael Praetorius’ father, has enrolled at the University of Wittenberg during the winter semester of 1528, at about age 13. Though we have no personal recollections from Schulteis about his time in Wittenberg, Gurlitt is able to put us in his shoes anyway by citing the recollections of a man who enrolled at the university on May 30, 1529, at the age of 24, Johannes Mathesius. (I was startled to discover that Mathesius’ series of sermons on Luther’s life, a sine qua non for any serious Luther biographer or Reformation historian, has not yet appeared in English.)

The bracketed [ ] interpolations in the Mathesius excerpt are Gurlitt’s, except for those that contain the original German. For the sake of translation accuracy, I consulted four editions of Mathesius’ work:

• Historien von des Ehrwirdigen in Gott Seligen thewren Manns Gottes, Doctoris Martini Luthers, anfang, lehr, leben und sterben (Nuremberg, 1566), folios 81, 82. (See link under “Sources” on the right.)
• A. J. D. Rust, ed., Leben Dr. Martin Luthers, in siebzehn Predigten (Berlin: Verlag von G. Crantz, 1841), p. 105-106, 107.
• Dr. Martin Luthers Leben (St. Louis: Druckerei des Lutherischen Concordia-Verlags [Concordia Publishing House], 1883), p. 125-126, 128.
• The edition Gurlitt used for his citation (rf. Endnote 1).

Michael Schulteis: Student in Wittenberg

Master Johannes Mathesius, who spent his first semester at the University of Wittenberg in 1529, paints a vivid picture of student life at that time. Among other things, he relates the following from that year:

[S]ince Doctor Johann Pommer, pastor in Wittenberg, was absent at this time [Bugenhagen was in Hamburg], being regularly called upon to organize churches and schools in the land of Saxony [Lower Saxony], our Doctor [Luther] preached three or four sermons every week. In them he expounded the Sunday Gospels, the Gospel of John, and chapters 19 and 20 of the second book of Moses in a wise and Christian manner. It was also at that time, on St. James’ Day [July 25], that he beautifully applied the legends of St. Christopher to all preachers and Christian people who carry Jesus Christ in their heart and arms, guard their conscience, and help other people, and who receive nothing but ingratitude from the world and false brothers for doing so.

During this year I also heard, in the first place, the Catechism and many other comforting doctrines expounded, by Doctor Justus Jonas [theological dean from 1523-1533] in the castle [the collegiate Castle Church] and by the three deacons, Master Georg Rörer, Johann Mantel, and Master Sebastian Fröschel [in the parish church]. Now, just as the Parish Church and Castle Church were very well managed at that time, and the word of Christ was wisely taught in good harmony and produced much fruit, so also the university was held in the highest honor at that time.

From the Doctor [Luther] I heard the last 22 chapters in the prophet Isaiah expounded in the course of perhaps forty weeks. From these lectures I often returned home filled with comfort and joy [confidence].

From Mr. [Herrn] Philipp [Melanchthon], the faithful and diligent professor, I heard during this short time a portion of Cicero’s Orations and the beautiful Latin oration pro Archia. During this year I also heard him lecture on the entire dialectics [logic], which he dictated to us afresh, together with rhetoric [including homiletics]. In the morning this great man explained the epistle to the Romans; on Wednesday he lectured on honorable ethics and virtue from Aristotle’s Ethica or book of ethics. We debated or gave speeches [declamiret] on this every week. Mr. Johann Bugenhagen [who returned to Wittenberg in June of 1529] expounded the epistles to the Corinthians; Doctor Jonas expounded several Psalms. Aurogallus [Matthäus Goldhahn, d. 1543] lectured on his Hebrew grammar and Psalm 119. Master Franz [Burchart] of Weimar lectured on Greek, Tulichius [died as rector in Lüneburg in 1540] on Cicero’s De officiis, Master Vach [Balthasar Fabricius from Vacha an der Werra] on Virgil. The old Master [Johannes] Volmar lectured on the Theoricas planetarum,* Master [Jakob] Mülich on the sphere.† Master Caspar Creuziger lectured on Terence to the young students in the paedagogium at this time.‡ The private schools were excellently managed in the same way. Master Winsheim [Veit Örtel from Windsheim], Master Kilian Goldstein, Master [Veit] Amerbach, and Master Erasmus Reinhold, and soon afterwards Master [Johannes] Marcellus, Mr. Georg Maior [Major], and Master [Paul] Eber all kept their students in good discipline and diligently lectured and repeated.

There was also good peace and harmony between students and townspeople. …

… We all lived and sang in our choir [hatten unser Canterey] with joy and in good spirits, in love and friendship. Moreover, from the lips of the old men, for whom we juveniles had an honorable awe and reverence, fell many good speeches and stories which I diligently retained. And because it was precisely Mr. Philipp who lectured on dialectics, we had very good discussions consisting of questions and instruction in these and other lectures. There was also no excessive or immature eating, drinking, or entertainment; everyone tended to his studies for which he had come to the place…¹

These captivating recollections were written down in the years 1562-1564. Many a detail in them would seem distorted by the passage of time, which tends to make the past more glorious. However, the great and significant thing that was alive in Wittenberg at that time still sounds out clearly on every side of this small portrait of time, which gives an accurate glimpse into the quiet sphere of the inner life of this great time, into the world which a young Wittenberg student experienced in those days, and into the wealth of stimuli and the abundance of important personalities whom he encountered on a daily basis and who filled his soul with sublime happiness.

In these incomparable surroundings, united by uniform convictions and common goals, Michael Schulteis also laid the foundation of his comprehensive education, which would set him apart from so many of his brothers in the ministry in the varied struggles of his life.

We first have to imagine the young Schulteis, occupied with the subjects of the trivium, as a student in one of those numerous Wittenberg “private schools,” which had arisen in the home of various professors according to Melanchthon’s standard. It is uncertain how long this course of study lasted for Schulteis. It is also uncertain when he obtained in Wittenberg the lowest academic degree, the honor of a Bachelor of Arts – or if he did at all;² his later mention as such may have been merely a professional designation. For indeed, by March 22, 1534, he has been appointed as a Bachelor at the Latin school in Torgau; on that day he receives a pay raise of 10 florins from the council.³ He thus seems to have belonged to the teaching profession for some time already, the customary first step toward the preaching ministry. His outward circumstances were apparently quite poor, which also would have taken him away from his studies in Wittenberg prematurely.

Endnotes

* This might refer to Giovanni Campano’s (also called Campanus von Novara) influential work Theorica Planetarum (1261-1264).

† That is, the sphere of the heavenly bodies, since the universe was thought to be arranged in a series of revolving, concentrically arranged spherical shells in which the heavenly bodies were set in a fixed relationship. Today we would call this astronomy.

‡ Heath’s New German and English Dictionary (1939) defines Pädagogium as a “secondary school (usually a private educational institution); college; academy; cramming establishment [or cram school].” The Journal of Education, ed. Henry Barnard (Hartford, CT: F. C. Brownell, 1860), in part 2 of its “History of the University of Tübingen,” dealing with the years 1535-1652, reads: “For better preparation in the languages, two preparatory schools were adjoined to the university proper; a ‘Trivial School,’ for the rudiments [of grammar, rhetoric, and logic], and a ‘Paedagogium’ immediately preceding entrance to the university. An eminently fit person was to be made ‘Paedagogarch,’ with three masters to assist him; and they were principally to teach grammar and rhetoric; to read with their pupils Terence, Virgil, and Cicero’s epistles; to make them compose a poem (carmen) and an epistle (epistolam); to instruct them in music, both simple and figured, and to sing with them, sometimes after meals, a motet or a psalm” (p. 70). A footnote says that the Paedagogium in Tübingen lasted until the Thirty Years’ War. It appears that the University of Wittenberg had a somewhat similar arrangement.

¹ Johannes Mathesius, Luthers Leben in Predigten, in Ausgewählte Werke, ed. G. Loesche (Prague, 1898), 3:159ff.

² Cf. Jul. Köstlin, Die Baccalaurei und Magistri der Wittenb. philosoph. Fakultät 1518-1537 (Halle, 1888), p. 14, where the conferrals from the years 1525-1532 are missing, with the note (fn. 4): “There seem to have been no conferrals in these years, partially due to the disturbances occasioned by Carlstadt and partially due to plague.”

³ Karl Pallas, Die Registraturen der Kirchenvisitationen im ehemals sächsischen Kurkreise, in Geschichtsquellen der Provinz Sachsen und angrenzender Gebiete, vol. 41, sect. 2, part 4 (Halle, 1911), p. 16.